Heart Attack Survivors Warning Why Apple Watch and WHOOP Could Not Detect His Emergency
A LinkedIn post by Minal Srivastava has sparked widespread discussion about the limitations of fitness wearables after her husband suffered a massive heart attack despite both his Apple Watch and WHOOP band showing normal readings.
The Incident
Srivastava, Vice President at Reliance Fashion and Lifestyle, recounted how her husband experienced classic heart attack symptoms—sweating, arm pain, and breathing difficulty—shortly after boarding a flight to Bengaluru. When flight attendants and the pilot offered immediate medical support and the option to deboard for emergency help, her husband consulted his two wearable devices.
Both the Apple Watch and WHOOP band displayed no abnormal readings, leading him to believe he was safe. Considering his 13-year-old son and trusting the devices, he decided to remain on the flight—a decision Srivastava described as "a death sentence".
The man's condition was so severe that doctors later described the surgery as a "Widow's Call"—a procedure so dangerous that families are typically prepared for the worst outcome. He survived thanks to timely medical intervention, surgical expertise, and his athletic conditioning.
The "False Assurance" Problem
Srivastava's post highlighted a critical disconnect between marketing promises and medical reality. She noted the irony that her husband's Apple Watch frequently triggered false alarms during post-exercise recovery, interpreting exhaustion as potential heart conditions, yet failed to detect an actual cardiac emergency.
This experience exemplifies what experts call a "misconception of security" created by health-tracking wearables. While these devices have been credited with saving lives through early detection of atrial fibrillation and irregular rhythms, cardiologists warn that no consumer wearable can reliably diagnose or prevent a heart attack in real time.
Wearable Limitations
Research supports these concerns about false alerts and their impact. A study analyzing data from the Pulsewatch clinical trial found that false atrial fibrillation alerts from smartwatches were associated with decreased self-perceived physical health and reduced disease self-management confidence. The study revealed that the most common causes of false alerts were poor-quality sensor signals and non-AF arrhythmias like premature atrial complexes.
The Apple Heart Study demonstrated similar limitations, showing that of 450 participants who received irregular pulse notifications, only 34% actually had atrial fibrillation when subsequently tested with professional ECG monitoring.
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10358285/
This incident occurs amid ongoing regulatory scrutiny of wearable health features. The FDA recently issued a warning letter to WHOOP regarding its Blood Pressure Insights feature, claiming the company was marketing an unauthorized medical device. The agency emphasized that "estimating blood pressure is not a low-risk function" and that inaccurate readings "can have serious repercussions for the user".
Srivastava emphasized that her post wasn't meant to condemn Apple or WHOOP, but rather to serve as a cautionary tale about understanding wearable limitations. She questioned how many users truly comprehend that these devices, despite sophisticated marketing, are not foolproof cardiac event detectors.
The incident underscores that while wearables can be valuable health companions for tracking trends and detecting certain conditions, they should never replace professional medical judgment or emergency care protocols during acute symptoms.